I'm calling BS on this. The first Retro developed Donkey Kong was near perfection and their track record is spotless.

Near perfection?

Was a great game,but I wouldn't say that far

Had they chosen not to go with the waggle-to-roll control scheme, it would have been near perfection (as near as humanly possible). Mechanically it wasn't as perfect as Super Meat Boy, but design-wise it was absolutely exemplary. That and the level of challenge ramped up significantly after the third world and was downright diabolical in world 8. Not a single point was it ever cheap, either.

No way in hell DK receives a 5/10. Even with the joke reviews this site gives. If it does... it is just something else to laugh about while playing the game and having a good time. I know it is hard to judge by videos alone... but they have all looked outstanding.

Would be hilarious, as the game likely deserves significantly higher (being Retro and everything)... but it would make for an entertaining time if true.

So a game deserves a high score just because Retro made it? What kind of shitty reasoning is that?

Also Tropical Flop. Nintendo has no games(3rd party support) and most of the exclusives have been lower than normal quality.

Given Retros track record, it would be odd. The games they've developed are sitting at 97, 92, 90 and 87. Of course that doesn't make it impossible for them to develop a bad game, some of the greatest devs of all time have managed to turn out some complete garbage. It would just seem highly improbable. It would be like expecting Naughty Dogs next game to bomb critically... actually it would be even crazier as Retro has a better track record than ND.

Not even sure what you're getting at with your statement on exclusives. I'd be willing to bet you never played any of them.

Also if you're going to bother responding to me, PLEASE make sure you actually read and understand my post first. I quit engaging you in discussion long ago because I got tired of always having to explain everything to you 10 times. I'm kinda going out on a limb here, so make some effort on your part. Thanks.

I'm calling BS on this. The first Retro developed Donkey Kong was near perfection and their track record is spotless.

Near perfection?

Was a great game,but I wouldn't say that far

It was the best platformer I played last gen and I consider it a threat to the best platformer of all time Yoshi's Island. I just recently 200%ed it and am just in awe of the detail and expert design that was put into that game. You rarely see this kind of commitment and craftsmanship in a game these days. One of only two games I felt deserving of a 10/10 score from the previous generation.

Nintendo already has a review/score video up on their Youtube channel where they quoted Gamespot saying "Looks beautiful on a big HD screen." That's definitely not a score confirmation, but you don't highlight websites that give you 5/10 in any kind of promotion. I don't think even Nintendo's marketing team is stupid enough to pull that off. So we know the review is already done, but I don't think it can possibly be that low.

Nintendo already has a review/score video up on their Youtube channel where they quoted Gamespot saying "Looks beautiful on a big HD screen." That's definitely not a score confirmation, but you don't highlight websites that give you 5/10 in any kind of promotion. I don't think even Nintendo's marketing team is stupid enough to pull that off. So we know the review is already done, but I don't think it can possibly be that low.

Their reviews have been sucking tremendous ass ever since the new site design, this hasn't been the same GS. They'll go out of their way to nitpick like crazy to have a nice word count, then they'll slap a bullshit number that makes no sense.

They are never indicative of a game's quality. I'll probably be a 5, or a 7 at most just because it's more of the same. But the game might be brilliant. Then you'll see brainless attention farts screaming FLOP to piss Nintendo fans off, even tho no one hyped the game. This shitty forum is predictable as hell, afterall.

Nintendo already has a review/score video up on their Youtube channel where they quoted Gamespot saying "Looks beautiful on a big HD screen." That's definitely not a score confirmation, but you don't highlight websites that give you 5/10 in any kind of promotion. I don't think even Nintendo's marketing team is stupid enough to pull that off. So we know the review is already done, but I don't think it can possibly be that low.

Their reviews have been sucking tremendous ass ever since the new site design, this hasn't been the same GS. They'll go out of their way to nitpick like crazy to have a nice word count, then they'll slap a bullshit number that makes no sense.

They are never indicative of a game's quality. I'll probably be a 5, or a 7 at most just because it's more of the same. But the game might be brilliant. Then you'll see brainless attention farts screaming FLOP to piss Nintendo fans off, even tho no one hyped the game. This shitty forum is predictable as hell, afterall.

Actually this game unlike the other wiiu game has an actual hype poll.The other wiiu games that flopped like sonic lost world weren't really hyped that much by the sheep.

I'll laugh if it happens if only because it will give Nintendo haters some sort of satisfaction and affirmation that "Nintendo is going down the drain" and "that they should go third-party!" I don't know why a game receiving a 5.0 would mean they should go third-party but I can see that claim being made.

I wasn't a fan of the first Donkey Kong Country Returns as it felt soulless but I did see the appeal for people. This one is looking like an even better game, like Retro took all of those old ideas and bred a more imaginative title. I won't get this game till later on down the line but I hope the best for those anticipating it; more great games means more great games.

I'll laugh if it happens if only because it will give Nintendo haters some sort of satisfaction and affirmation that "Nintendo is going down the drain" and "that they should go third-party!" I don't know why game receiving a 5.0 would mean they should go third-party but I can see that claim being made.

"Because Wii U is weak and any Wii U would get better scores on PS4/ONE, which have more power and no gimmicks..." :roll:

I'll laugh if it happens if only because it will give Nintendo haters some sort of satisfaction and affirmation that "Nintendo is going down the drain" and "that they should go third-party!" I don't know why game receiving a 5.0 would mean they should go third-party but I can see that claim being made.

"Because Wii U is weak and any Wii U would get better scores on PS4/ONE, which have more power and no gimmicks..." :roll:

If that link is true, it's a pretty damn huge gap between it and the game informer review. I have a hard time seeing McShea give a platformer--especially one made by Retro Studios--that low of a score, but it wouldn't surprise me. McShea is a complete joke nowadays, with no consistency whatsoever. Kevin V's the only one worth listening to tbo.

Why do you all let that guy get under your skin so much? He's just a reviewer. Who cares what he thinks?

Because every time he flops a game, it just draws out a bunch of trolls, and the average IQ of this place goes down a good 20 points. You could barely discuss Skyward Sword when McShea's "review" (or troll post, in my honest opinion, as someone who found Skyward Sword to be overrated) first came out without some dipshit bringing up McShea's review as proof that Skyward Sword sucks (apparently, their logic is because he goes against the curve, he's probably the only one who's "telling it like it is,") or they just go "7.5," as if that score is somehow law. Maybe if it wasn't a Systems War rule (or what the Hell ever it is) that GameSpot reviews be treated like the only scores worth discussing here, you would never hear about McShea. Basically, he just baits trolling and it just exacerbates the trolling that already goes on here, which we already have plenty of when McShe doesn't flop something for lulz.

Ironically, most of those people were cows that later began to hate McShea. :P

Why do you all let that guy get under your skin so much? He's just a reviewer. Who cares what he thinks?

You could barely discuss Skyward Sword when McShea's "review" (or troll post, in my honest opinion, as someone who found Skyward Sword to be overrated) first came out without some dipshit bringing up McShea's review as proof that Skyward Sword sucks (apparently, their logic is because he goes against the curve, he's probably the only one who's "telling it like it is,") or they just go "7.5," as if that score is somehow law. ...

This is my biggest problem with people's perception of the guy. Hate him or love him all you want, but to think that the rest of the industry's journalists aren't critical... well, I call shenanigans.

Why do you all let that guy get under your skin so much? He's just a reviewer. Who cares what he thinks?

You could barely discuss Skyward Sword when McShea's "review" (or troll post, in my honest opinion, as someone who found Skyward Sword to be overrated) first came out without some dipshit bringing up McShea's review as proof that Skyward Sword sucks (apparently, their logic is because he goes against the curve, he's probably the only one who's "telling it like it is,") or they just go "7.5," as if that score is somehow law. ...

This is my biggest problem with people's perception of the guy. Hate him or love him all you want, but to think that the rest of the industry's journalists aren't critical... well, I call shenanigans.

Why do you all let that guy get under your skin so much? He's just a reviewer. Who cares what he thinks?

You could barely discuss Skyward Sword when McShea's "review" (or troll post, in my honest opinion, as someone who found Skyward Sword to be overrated) first came out without some dipshit bringing up McShea's review as proof that Skyward Sword sucks (apparently, their logic is because he goes against the curve, he's probably the only one who's "telling it like it is,") or they just go "7.5," as if that score is somehow law. ...

This is my biggest problem with people's perception of the guy. Hate him or love him all you want, but to think that the rest of the industry's journalists aren't critical... well, I call shenanigans.

Certainly. I think a lot of his persona is to go against the grain.

It's to get Website hits. If you have an outlying score you're more likely to be mentioned in discussion and make the front page of the game on Metacritic.

ok? when a game scores low why do people on her try pull sexist shit against the reviewer?

It´s the way fanboys use to discredit a review these days.

If it´s McShea then it has been McShea´d,if it´s Carolyn then it´s something something transgender,if it´s Kevin it´s because he´s gay,if its McInnis,Watters or whatever it´s because they´re idiots,if it´s Danny must be because he´s british.

lol

But people actually for the most part like Kevin, I myself included. He's like that one good reviewer in this site full of trolls and hipsters. I didn't know Danny reviewed games though... o_O

Why do you all let that guy get under your skin so much? He's just a reviewer. Who cares what he thinks?

You could barely discuss Skyward Sword when McShea's "review" (or troll post, in my honest opinion, as someone who found Skyward Sword to be overrated) first came out without some dipshit bringing up McShea's review as proof that Skyward Sword sucks (apparently, their logic is because he goes against the curve, he's probably the only one who's "telling it like it is,") or they just go "7.5," as if that score is somehow law. ...

This is my biggest problem with people's perception of the guy. Hate him or love him all you want, but to think that the rest of the industry's journalists aren't critical... well, I call shenanigans.

Certainly. I think a lot of his persona is to go against the grain.

I think the biggest problem with Mcshea is that he parades his own personal opinion way too much when I feel the job of the reviewer is to inform readers whether or not a game is for them. I feel he isn't doing much anything of value when he just talks about himself.

I find this to be a general problem for video game reviews these days. I feel reviews should try to remain as objective as possible by informing readers of the type of gamer that would and wouldn't enjoy the title in question. You know, try to see other people's points of view as much as possible.